- From: Guillaume via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 20:33:09 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> The related commit message refers to #8940, which seems unrelated.
#8970 is the related issue...
> If I am not mistaken, it has to do with the implied specificity (#9069).
... and the motivation was to allow copying the selector onto non-nested style rules. (I do not see how that could be useful to authors.) If I understand correctly, the specificity changes if `:scope` is explicit instead of implied, but not the specificity of `&`.
> Chrome also absolutizes a scoping root selector when `@scope` is nested in a style rule. I cannot find where this is specified, nor a corresponding test on WPT. And it does not absolutize a scoping limit selector.
>
> This somewhat suggests that `<scope-start>` produces `<relative-selector-list>`, at least when nested in a style rule. Should it?
In Chrome, `@scope (> root) ... {}` is invalid so it is not a `<relative-selector-list>`. `@scope to (> limit) {}` is valid though (#13290), but is not absolutized when `@scope` is nested in a style rule.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by cdoublev
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11212#issuecomment-3730483084 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 9 January 2026 20:33:10 UTC